The Chickasaw messenger. (Okolona, Miss.) 1880-1900, 1887-09-15

LANlf iHt.NattHN .HtstfHI.Is
nis sn bat sranss that the
I people 81 our State DO MOI agllate
The stoels lsv more than they have
done, butt nay b bosause hey
have never reflected how much IL
would be to the interest Of the far
mers. By stock law the writer
means such a law as would require
the owners Of stock to keep them
in pastures or enclosures and be
Irresponsible TOR the damages done
by their stock upon the crops Of
their neighbors.
Any ono can understand how the
custom Of fencing up the crops and
turning out the livestock had its
origin. When the country was
new and the native pastures luxu-
RANT, il was true economy TO fence
up the small fields that were culti-
waited and leave the large herds ont
on the commons. This was then a
stock country and the livestock
was worth more than the cultivat-
ed crops. But this state Of things
is reversed now, and ours has be-
come a populous farming country
where the cultivated crops are
worth mere than all the farm ami
mails raised. II would not be a
perversion of truth to 60 still fur
Their and say that the fencing in
this country together with the in
terest on ITS cost is worth more
money than all the farm animals
raised upon the commons. The
people keep their work-stOck up
and feed them anyway, so that on
ly COWS. hogs, sheep and goats are
allowed to run at large and they
are so starved upon the scanty
range as to be almost worthless.
II these facts be true why do we
adhere to that old relic Of bar bar
ism which fences up crops that can
not run away and turns out animals
to stray off in a vain search for
pasturage that will sustain life.
Under the present system a man
may not own q foot Of land. yet he
may keep a hundred heads of poor
starving stock to break down his
neighbor's fences. This is a cause
Of many quarrels and difficulties
between men and it viii be per-
petual source Of bad feeling among
neighbors as long as our present
system remains.
If a man owns break-fcnce stock
and they all break fences when
starved, he should keep them at
! his own expense and not require
his neighbors to fence against them.
In other words a man should keep
what belongs to him on bis own
premises at his own expense and
be responsible for trespass upon
others. fla man buys land and
pays tax on it others should not
have the right of free pasturage
upon it without his consent any
more than they would have the
right to cultivate it free Of charge.
All writers upon Southern agri-
culture agree that we need more
grass and hay, but no one can af-
ford to fence his crop and his pas
ture land too, at an expense of one
hundred dollars per mile. If we
had the stock law, farmers would
be encouraged to SOW grasses and
prepare meadows and this would
induce good tenants and troopers
to live with them where free grass
could be obtained. We would then
not have SO much stock, but il
would be better and easier kept.
Scrubs would not mix up with pure
bloods, nor would contagious dis
eases spread among animals from
one plantation TO another There
are many other good effects which
would be derived from stock law.
The poor land would be utilized
and improved without the expense
ofcommercial fertilizers and a new
impetus would be given to the
farming industry.
In Soufh Carolina Georesio aud